Skip to main content

About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
for payback for their votes. >> after the election of jimmy carter, he went to washington, d.c., he came back with some bacon. that's what you do. our people in an overwhelming way supported the reelection of this president and there ought to be a quid pro quo and you ought to exercise leadership -- of course not just that, but why not. martha: you have got to bring home the bacon according to that councilwoman. many cities and state are in the same situation. will they make the same request of the president and washington? stuart, what do you think about that piece of tape there? >> finally it has been said in public. the detroit city councilmember saying publicly we deserve a bailout. detroi indeed vote overwhelmingly for president obama. 73% of the vote went for president obama. detroit will probably run out of money within days. the word bankruptcy is being applied to the city of detroit. she says there ought to be a quid pro quo, why not. she is publicly calling for what amounts to a federal bailout. it would be called help for the city, help for the states. but you asked it. who is next
? election coming up? what happened in the u.n.? what's the feeling there? >> well, certainly the israelis have made no secret of the fact that this is a direct punitive measure for what happened at the u.n. last thursday where, of course, the palestinians managed get an upgraded status there in the u.n. general assembly going to nonmember observer state. of course, the word state there is the operative one for the palestinians. the palestinians now say they do, in fact, have a state which is a taertory that is defined as the west bank, gaza, and east jerusalem. so, therefore, the palestinians are saying that this obviously would make the implementation of this state all but impossible because they say it would be impossible for them to even reach their capital that they want to have, which is, of course, east jerusalem. this is certainly a measure that's cause aing lot of international controversy. you were saying that great britain and france have already put out staunch statements aimed at the israelis. the israelis are saying, yes, all these countries have voiced their concern. they're
would note that the president was in cam cambodia after the election, and then he was in burma, and secretary clinton moves throughout the region as well as secretary panetta, and the amount of activities i do and my forces do is a prompt jump than what we did in the past, and we're looking for opportunities to do more exercise. we are doing more of those things already, and that's viz l to the allies. i think it's visible to the partners, and i feel it visible to the region. we oftenment to jump to, well, where's the next aircraft carry your or the submarine. that's the signal. we will, over time, as you've heard secretary panetta say, rebalance towards the pacific, and i mentioned opening remarks. we're rapidly moving the most capable assets into the region because of the ballistic missile defense threats we face and those things, so it's about a holistic approach, and what i do on the military side is just one aspect of it. it's got to be tie into the economic side, what's happening in the diplomatic side, and so we're working hard that accomplishes this strategy. >> a quick
we asked -- these are exit polls from november 6, from the last election, of course. should same-sex marriage be legally recognized, yes, 49%, no, 46%. obviously, the country is closely divided on this. but we have seen a little bit of a shift in the numbers. brian, do you think that the time has come that attitudes about this have changed and the court will go with that change? >> no, i don't think that's the case at all. i mean, look, six months ago, north carolina voted by over 61% to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman. of course, there were the four deep blue liberal statings that voted to redefine marriage, but that's an indication of the future of the you country. there is no constitutional right to redefine marriage. our founding fathers didn't see it that way, the last supreme court decision, the united states supreme court said there was no federal question here. so this is essentially making the law up as you go along, it is reading into the constitution. i do not believe the united states supreme court is going to launch another culture war, just like r
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)